I have recently finished the eerily, wonderful thriller, Hide my Eyes by Margery Allingham, which reads as a compelling combination of Roald Dahl and Dickens.
There is never any doubt as to the villain’s identity yet we are compelled to read on until the end because of the strength of the characterisation which celebrates the grotesque as well as the power of enduring loyalty despite everything.
Love is both an adventure and a deep source of despair.
In the speech below, the hubristic speaker leaks personal information that is psychologically compelling because the choice of figurative language is so irresistibly fascinating.
For the speaker uses surprising metaphors to distinguish his very individual take on relationships and the world.’Any kind of affection is a solvent.‘ Notice the peculiarity of the metaphor relating to an industrial liquid that can dissolve solids. Think about the peculiarity of this metaphor and the speaker’s evident pride in his choice of comparison. Doesn’t it make the reader feel uneasy? Even slightly queasy? The dismissive quality of the declaration may emanate from a back story featuring neglect and invisibility. it is the highly idiosyncratic quality of the speaker’s language choices that create his identity. When you are working on an antagonist their speech may be just as important in delivering their character to the reader as their actions.
Look also at the visceral, metaphorical description of intimacy, ‘tear the skin’ which generates a palpable sense of harm, as well as emphasising the speaker’s unhealthy and pronounced sense of superiority. Estrangement is chilling as it permits murder through the depersonalization of the other. If you don’t connect with others, if you only feign care and friendship, then you can objectify others and even inflict pain to the point of their destruction. .
The description of the revelation as a ‘plain, mechanical truth,‘ surprises as the adjectives hint at something inarguably recognised and even shared. Yet notice how the adjective ‘mechanical‘ jars. How can truth be mechanical we wonder? It feels oxymoronic, forces us to stop reading and to think. The oddity is very useful here and it alarms us!
If the speaker resists the idea of connection then he is a dangerous antagonist. He has a philosophy of his own identity that he adheres to privately even though his public persona may be more charming and ostensibly friendly. I admire the choices of verbs here: ‘melts and adulterates the subject.’ You can detect something sinister which foregrounds his way of disposing of his victims whilst also being alerted to his fear of being lost too. The summary of the ‘recipe for success‘ as ‘simple’ hints at a boastfulness even grandiosity that is chilling and horribly arrogant. The triple: ‘successful, bright and indestructible’ delivers his villainy to us whole. And we wonder if this careful, callous engineer of death can ever be caught?
“I never let anything tear the skin. I’ve never been faintly fond of anything or of anybody in my life.” He spoke lightly but with satisfaction. “I’m deadly serious about this. I spotted the plain mechanical truth of it as a child. .. Any kind of affection is a solvent. It melts and adulterates the subject and by indulging it he loses his identity and hence his efficiency. By keeping myself to myself in the face of every conceivable attack I have remained successful, bright, and indestructible. It’s a simple recipe for a hundred per cent success…”
